• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Should we be required to identify ourselves to police officers?

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Graphicd00d

Senior member
Aug 10, 2001
293
0
0
Originally posted by: sygyzy
I agree that our identity and information is considered property. Intellectual if anything. If they can ask you for your name now, what will stop a male officer from asking if a female "suspect" is dating anyone?

It's great that FallenHero is such a big fan of giving information away. I am by no means anti-government but I see a very dangerous path we are heading toward here. With the Patriot Act and the acts that followed, soon phone taps, email logs, etc will be even more prevalent and generally accepted. Why hasn't this been a problem 4 months ago? 2 years ago? It has, you just weren't around to see the arguments. Privacy has and always will be an issue. But it'll only get worse because of people that basically volunteer everything they have at the first flash of a siren.
Sygyzy, I totally agree with you here. People will always use the arguement "If you aren't doing anything wrong you have noting to hide" and this is a very dangerous mentality and will bite them in the ass later.

It's best not to throw your pearls to swine. They will probably always be part of the 98% that does nothing and hides under their beds waiting for someone else to do it. Remember it took 2% of us at the start to fight for our rights that we enjoy now when King George was stomping on our heads.

In the beginning a patriot is scarce, hated and scorned. But when his/her cause succeeds it cost nothing to be a patriot.

Keep that in mind my friend and keep fighting.

 

Yossarian

Lifer
Dec 26, 2000
18,010
1
81
Originally posted by: FFMCobalt
Originally posted by: Electric Amish
Originally posted by: GroundZero
it is illegal to not cary identification on your person in the usa

I call bullshit without some proof.
It is bullsh|t. You can be on private property without identification. Once you step into public, you're required to have ID on you or be arrested.
what Gestapo-run nation do you live in?
 

jimmygates

Platinum Member
Sep 4, 2000
2,134
2
81
I don't believe there is a law where you have to carry your ID unless you are:

1. Driving (Some states DL's double as ID's)
2. Conceal Carry (Carry firearm)



Everyone I come in contact with I ask for identification. Believe it or not there are people in this world that have never gone to the DMV to get a ID.


If I make a "consensual encounter" with somebody and they blow me off, I have no justification to arrest them. A "consensual encounter" is where I meet Joe Blow on the street and ask him for his ID. At that point Joe Blow has commited no crime and him talking to me is completely voluntary. If he didn't feel like showing me ID and decided to walk away I have to justification to go after him.


Now if I detained Joe Blow it's a bit different. I can detain Joe Blow if I have reasonable suspicion he has commited a crime. The definition of reasonable suspicion is a set of specific and articulatable facts and circumstances as would cause an officer with similar training and experience to reasonabley suspect that the individual is, was, or is about to be involved in criminal activity. I only think Joe Blow commited the crime but I'm not sure. Joe Blow is not under arrest but he's not free to leave. Joe Blow is detained until I can resolve the reason for the stop. (Identifiy the suspects, talk to witnesses, etc etc.) Joe Blow does not have to tell me his name when he is detained however he cannot lie to me. (funny huh?) While detained I can perform a patdown search for weapons. (Patting the outer clothing for weapons, not going into pockets unless during the patdown you felt something resembling a weapon.)



If I arrest Joe Blow I can perform a full search of his persons and things in his immediate surroundings. (If he was in a car I get to search passenger compartments unless the arrest is for something that I articulate I need to search the whole car, i.e. narcotics) I need probable cause to arrest Joe Blow. Probable cause is defined as a set of facts that would cause a person of ordinary prudence to entertain an hosest and strong belief that the person to be arrested is guilty of a crime. Facts to establish probabl cause my include, but are not limited to:

- direct investigation or reports,
- circumstantial evidence, or
- secondhand statements from reliable informants.

Technically traffic stops are arrests by the definition. I performed an enforcement stop (traffic stop) usually because I observed (direct investigation) the vehicle in violation of the vehicle code. However courts in California (maybe in other states also) view enforcement stops as a detention. During an enforcement stop (in California) only the driver is detained (unless the passengers aren't wearing seatbelts!) because the driver commited the violation. Passengers in the violators vehicle are free to leave.




-Jimbo




 

Spencer278

Diamond Member
Oct 11, 2002
3,637
0
0
Originally posted by: jimmygates
I don't believe there is a law where you have to carry your ID unless you are:

1. Driving (Some states DL's double as ID's)
2. Conceal Carry (Carry firearm)



Everyone I come in contact with I ask for identification. Believe it or not there are people in this world that have never gone to the DMV to get a ID.


If I make a "consensual encounter" with somebody and they blow me off, I have no justification to arrest them. A "consensual encounter" is where I meet Joe Blow on the street and ask him for his ID. At that point Joe Blow has commited no crime and him talking to me is completely voluntary. If he didn't feel like showing me ID and decided to walk away I have to justification to go after him.


Now if I detained Joe Blow it's a bit different. I can detain Joe Blow if I have reasonable suspicion he has commited a crime. The definition of reasonable suspicion is a set of specific and articulatable facts and circumstances as would cause an officer with similar training and experience to reasonabley suspect that the individual is, was, or is about to be involved in criminal activity. I only think Joe Blow commited the crime but I'm not sure. Joe Blow is not under arrest but he's not free to leave. Joe Blow is detained until I can resolve the reason for the stop. (Identifiy the suspects, talk to witnesses, etc etc.) Joe Blow does not have to tell me his name when he is detained however he cannot lie to me. (funny huh?) While detained I can perform a patdown search for weapons. (Patting the outer clothing for weapons, not going into pockets unless during the patdown you felt something resembling a weapon.)



If I arrest Joe Blow I can perform a full search of his persons and things in his immediate surroundings. (If he was in a car I get to search passenger compartments unless the arrest is for something that I articulate I need to search the whole car, i.e. narcotics) I need probable cause to arrest Joe Blow. Probable cause is defined as a set of facts that would cause a person of ordinary prudence to entertain an hosest and strong belief that the person to be arrested is guilty of a crime. Facts to establish probabl cause my include, but are not limited to:

- direct investigation or reports,
- circumstantial evidence, or
- secondhand statements from reliable informants.

Technically traffic stops are arrests by the definition. I performed an enforcement stop (traffic stop) usually because I observed (direct investigation) the vehicle in violation of the vehicle code. However courts in California (maybe in other states also) view enforcement stops as a detention. During an enforcement stop (in California) only the driver is detained (unless the passengers aren't wearing seatbelts!) because the driver commited the violation. Passengers in the violators vehicle are free to leave.




-Jimbo
So if I'm driving in CA with other people in my car when I get pulled over the other people can get out of the car and start walking away and the cop can't do anything?
 

jimmygates

Platinum Member
Sep 4, 2000
2,134
2
81
So if I'm driving in CA with other people in my car when I get pulled over the other people can get out of the car and start walking away and the cop can't do anything?[/quote]


Technically yes, passengers are free to leave if the reason for the enforcement stop is for vehicle code violations. (which only the driver or owner can commit unless passengers aren't wearing seatbelts, etc) If I stop a vehicle because your vehicle matches the description of 4 guys who just robbed a bank and drove off then everyone in the vehicle is detained.


Eventhough passengers are free to leave I usually express to them to stay in the vehicle for their safety and mine. (Some officers are trigger happy if they see 3 guys pile out of a car) If I arrest the driver the passenger(s) may drive the vehicle and leave with the owners permission.



-Jimbo
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY